Get Wonkbook delivered to your inbox or mobile device every morning. It's everything you need to know about domestic and economic policy (and some stuff you don't).Subscribe now.

Posted at 8:00 AM ET, 02/ 8/2011

Oregon considers cellphone radiation label

By
Cecilia Kang

Oregon state Sen. Chip Shields on Monday introduced a bill that would require retailers to put warning labels on cellphones and packaging of wireless devices, advising consumers of possible risks associated with radio frequency exposure.

Shields, a Democrat who represents parts of Portland, introduced the legislation along with five other Democratic and Republican state lawmakers, amid growing concern that long-term exposure to cellphones could lead to health problems, including cancer, particularly among youth and children. San Francisco has adopted the nation's first ordinance requiring labeling of radiation data at retail stores -- a rule the wireless industry has fought with a lawsuit against the city.

In the Oregon bill, Shields said recent medical studies including the multinational Interphone study, showed there was a greater chance of health problems associated with long-term use and that more research was needed.

"Given the absence of any federal entity with primary jurisdiction to evaluate and regulate health and safety effects of cellular telephones on humans . . . the state of Oregon may lawfully exercise its health and safety and police powers to prohibit cellular telephones in this state unless the cellular telephones and their packaging contain a visible, written label advising consumers of possible risks and steps a consumer can take to reduce the risk of radio-frequency radiation exposure," the bill states.

Specifically, the bill calls for a label with the following:

WARNING: This is a radio-frequency (RF), radiation emitting device that has nonthermal biological effects for which no safety guidelines have yet been established. Controversy exists as to whether these effects are harmful to humans. Exposure to RF radiation may be reduced by limiting your use of this device and keeping away from the head and body.

The label would be affixed on the front and back of the package. It would also be on the back of the cellphone, occupying at least 30 percent of the surface.

The CTIA wireless trade group refutes concerns about cellphone safety, saying studies by the World Health Organization and American Cancer Society show radio frequencies cannot harm people.

“The scientific consensus from these impartial health organizations is that there are no negative health effects from consumer use of wireless devices," said John Walls, CTIA's vice president of communications. "Warning labels would mislead consumers suggesting that wireless devices are not safe which contradicts the consensus of the leading federal and international health organizations.”

The CTIA has successfully fought legislation in California and Maine over the past year, sending lobbyists to speak at public forums against warning labels. Apple, AT&T, Verizon and the CTIA have also hired locally based lobbyists to fight the legislation that could curb consumers' appetites for cellphones.

Thanks for the article. Journalists and others should stop looking to the WHO and American Cancer Society for reassuring information about the risk from cell phones. The WHO is compromised by members of the telecom companies who sit on it's board of directors and huge funding from Bill Bates. Similarly the ACS receives enormous funding from the telecom companies so they continue to quarterback for the telecoms. IN OCT. 2010 MOTOROLA BEGAN PUTTING BRAIN CANCER WARNINGS IN THEIR USER MANUALS. We would like to see those warnings taken out of the fine print and put on the phones themselves as well as the packaging. Their warnings are to cover their liability as it is now confirmed by studies around the world that these devices may in the future cause more death and disease than cancer and asbestos combined. Children are at 5 times the risk (Lennart Hardel study). Partoid and salivary gland tumors have been confirmed by Israeli studies, DNA damage to sperm has been confirmed by an Argentine study. This information has been known by the industry and the military for over 60 years but continues to be kept under wraps with NOT ONE ONGOING STUDY IN THE UNITED STATES ON THE EFFECTS OF RADIO FREQUENCY RADIATION FROM CELL PHONES but there have been thousands of studies in Europe and elsewhere. This study was done in 1995 Bioelectromagnetics. 1995;16(3):207-10.
Acute low-intensity microwave exposure increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells.
Lai H, Singh NP.
Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle 98195, USA.
Abstract
Levels of DNA single-strand break were assayed in brain cells from rats acutely exposed to low-intensity 2450 MHz microwaves using an alkaline microgel electrophoresis method. Immediately after 2 h of exposure to pulsed (2 microseconds width, 500 pulses/s) microwaves, no significant effect was observed, whereas a dose rate-dependent [0.6 and 1.2 W/kg whole body specific absorption rate (SAR)] increase in DNA single-strand breaks was found in brain cells of rats at 4 h postexposure. Furthermore, in rats exposed for 2 h to continuous-wave 2450 MHz microwaves (SAR 1.2 W/kg), increases in brain cell DNA single-strand breaks were observed immediately as well as at 4 h postexposure.

The cell industry continues to repeat the mantra, "it's inconclusive" however it is now hard science. Cell phones kill. These devices were marketed with no pre market safety testing and the FCC will undoubtedly be facing a law suit for racketeering and fraud by giving the telecoms a license to kill.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.